CAR war crimes court faces 2028 closure over funding gap

By Grace Kim

The Central African Republic’s Special Criminal Court faces possible closure by 2028, with thousands of victims still awaiting justice.

In a report released in October 2026, Amnesty International warned that the court could close without urgent funding. People suspected of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including senior officials, could escape justice.

Amnesty stated: “Other than the UN and the EU, no state providing financial support to SCC at the moment.”

What did Amnesty International find?

The October 2026 report examines the SCC’s work from the first trial in 2022 through the report date, covering its progress, institutional shortcomings, operational obstacles, budget crisis and future prospects. It also reflects victims’ views on impunity and the court’s work.

Amnesty focused on the gap between completed cases and thousands awaiting justice. Many survivors of atrocities committed during the 2003 coup and the 2012-2014 armed conflict still wait for those responsible to answer criminal charges.

This is an assessment of institutional survival, not a report of a new SCC judgment. The central issue is whether the court can remain operational long enough to address the waiting cases. Amnesty identified 2028 as a risk point rather than an announced closure schedule.

Takeaway: Funding now threatens the SCC’s ability to keep prosecuting war crimes and crimes against humanity.

How much has the SCC achieved?

The SCC was inaugurated in 2018. Its first trial began in 2022. Since then, the court has:

• Tried six cases.
• Convicted 19 people for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
• Awarded reparations to victims in one case.

The convictions and reparations show that the court has produced legal outcomes. Six cases, however, have not resolved the wait described by Amnesty for victims of the 2003 coup and the 2012-2014 conflict.

The court’s record also includes cases involving senior figures. Amnesty warned that suspected perpetrators, including senior officials, could escape justice if the SCC cannot secure urgent support.

Takeaway: The SCC has secured convictions, but thousands of victims still await proceedings against those responsible.

Why is funding the immediate legal risk?

Amnesty’s report identifies financial support from the UN and EU, while no other state provides support. That funding position leaves the court exposed if the institutional contributors cannot sustain its operations.

The report treats the budget crisis as an immediate obstacle to further cases. Without emergency support, the SCC could close by 2028, according to Amnesty’s October 2026 assessment.

A closure would stop further progress through the court. More victims could remain without prosecutions, while more alleged perpetrators could escape accountability for offences already occurring in the 2003 coup and 2012-2014 conflict.

Takeaway: The funding shortage threatens not only future cases but the SCC’s continued existence.

What other accountability and security developments matter?\n

Separately, the International Criminal Court has convicted former Seleka rebel commander Mahamat Said Abdel Kani on four counts, including torture and persecution, for crimes against humanity involving torture and abuse of prisoners in Bangui.

The charges stem from the 2013 conflict, when predominantly Muslim Seleka rebels seized power and ousted President François Bozizé, prompting opposition from mainly Christian anti-Balaka militias. The ICC conviction does not resolve the SCC’s domestic funding crisis.

Meanwhile, the UN has warned against premature withdrawal of peacekeepers from the Central African Republic as the war in Sudan fuels instability along the country’s eastern borders.

UN Special Representative Valentine Rugwabiza told the Security Council that an attack on Am-Dafock on June 30 killed civilians and security personnel, displaced 17,000 people and injured six UN peacekeepers.

Takeaway: Progress in one court does not remove the SCC’s financial crisis or the security pressures surrounding its work.

What should practitioners watch?

The practical consequence is uncertainty over whether the SCC can continue its docket. A funding failure could leave more victims without prosecutions and more alleged perpetrators without a trial.

Legal teams and victim representatives should monitor three signals:

• New funding commitments from states beyond the UN and EU.
• Continued SCC operations as the possible 2028 closure approaches.
• Additional prosecutions concerning the 2003 coup and 2012-2014 conflict, together with the status of reparations awarded in one case.

Practitioners should not treat the six-case record and 19 convictions as proof of durable capacity. The court’s ability to continue hearing cases depends on a funding solution that Amnesty says remains urgent.

Takeaway: Emergency financing will determine whether the SCC delivers more justice or joins the list of stalled war-crimes institutions.